indonwedurep03

7/31/2019 indonwedurep03

1/14

WORKSHOP REPORT

System of Rice Intensification(SRI)

By:Sutoyo

I N D O N E S I AJl. Tebet Dalam IV D/5A Jakarta 12810

Tel. 021-8297228 Fax. 021-8307591 E-mail:[email protected]

@2003


2/14

1

ContentsI. Background 2II. Objectives. 2III. Schedule . 2IV. Participants. 2V. Speaker . 3VI. Outcomes 3

1. Farmers Presentations 32. NGO Partners Presentations... 53. Modules. 12

VII. Follow-up .. 12

1. Farmers .. 122. NGOs 14VIII. In Closing ... 15


3/14

2

I. Background

World Education (WE) and its partners experience in developing a sustainableagriculture program based on IPM have already managed to reduce rice farmersoperational costs. This reduction is due to lower outlay for external inputs such as seeds,

fertilizers and pesticides. However, this approach has yet to achieve a significant increasein production. That is why WE and its network were attracted by the claims emanatingfrom SRI trials in other parts of Asia. It is hoped that SRI would increase yields whilestill being low-cost.

For the last two years, WE has been collecting information on SRI from Indonesia as wellas other countries experiences, including from where the system originated, Madagascar.Based on this input, WE has developed a guide for applying the popular and provenFarmer Field School approach to development of SRI among farmers. This document isnot so much geared toward technology transfer, but rather as a learning process guide tothe implementation of SRI.

Since last year, WE and its network in Indonesia have been carrying out experiments onSRI together with farmers. This workshop was intended to reflect on the experiences of farmers, organizations and networks in experimenting with SRI. Based on thesereflections - and on sessions specifically devoted to the topic - a revised guide that could

be more effective for training farmers would then be developed.

II. Objectives

1. Farmers sharing their experiences in implementing SRI

2. Improvement of SRI modules3. Determination of future SRI work plans

III. Schedule

Workshop activities were held between 1-5 June 2003 in Sidoharjo Village, PolanharjoDistrict, Klaten Regency, Central Java

IV. Participants

53 people participated in the SRI Workshop, including:1. Lampung Wakak Jukuk Network (JWJL) = 5 people: 1 staff member and 4 farmers2. Rural Technology Development Organization (Lembaga Pengembangan Teknologi

Pedesaan - LPTP) = 14 people: 4 staff members and 10 farmers3. Algheins = 2 people: 1 staff member and 1 farmer 4. PAN North Sumatra = 3 people: 1 staff member and 2 farmers5. CRS Indonesia = 1 staff member


4/14

3

6. IPPHTI = 2 people from Ciamis, West Java and Lumajang, East Java7. VECO and Partners = 3 people: 1 VECO staff member and 2 partners8. Lembaga Gita Pertiwi = 2 people: 1 staff member and 1 farmer 9. World Education = 3 staff 10. Polanharjo District Office of Agriculture = 4 people

11. The Tani Makmur farmers group from Sidoharjo = 3 people12. Local committee = 10 people

V. Speakers

The SRI workshop guest speaker was Dr. Anischan Gani from the Rice Crop ResearchInstitute (Balai Penelitian Tanaman Padi - BALITPA) in Sukamandi, West Java. NormanUphoff and Roland Bunch were unable to attend due to other engagements.

VI. Outcomes

The SRI workshop used a mutual learning process whereby each farmer group explainedthe results of their SRI trials; and NGO staff also offered their views on SRI. Workshop

participants were then given time to respond and clarify. In this way, each party gaineduseful input for improving experiments in the future.

The speaker, Dr. Anischan Gani from Balai Penelitian Tanaman Padi in Sukamandi, also provided input during the workshop.

World Education had already prepared the modules one year earlier. These were

discussed, and participants and the speaker provided input in the hope that the modulescould be improved upon for further dissemination of SRI.

Outcomes of this experience sharing process in SRI implementation were as follows:

1. Farmers Group Presentations

SRI is basically quite new to the WE network. For this reason it is natural that there arediffering perspectives on SRI and experiments implemented by farmer groups. Farmer groups experiments in SRI presented in the workshop were as follows:

a. Seed Bed NurseriesEach group used different materials in making seed beds; some used bamboo baskets,coconut leaf baskets ( kiso) , boxes made from the outer layer of banana tree stems, andsome made their seed beds directly in the fields. However, the principle was the same to have dry seedbed nurseries. Most farmers used similar growing media - a mixture of ash from rice husks and organic materials. The hope was that a highly fertile growingmedia, rich in organic matter, would provide seedlings with strong, large root structures.Such root structures, the logic goes, would ensure healthy, high-yielding crops.


5/14

4

b. ExperimentsExperiments undertaken by each farmers group were: planting 7 to 14-day-old seedlings,and planting one seedling in each hole, using variable planting spacing from 20 cm x 20cm, 23 cm x 23 cm, 25 cm x 25 cm, 30 cm x 30 cm and even using a variation on a

traditional Javanese practice for paddy ( jajar legowo) ; that is, 10 cm x 20 cm x 40 cm.Fertilizer use was not a focus of these experiments. To gauge the success of SRI, farmer groups purposely made comparisons with conventional methods that is, using 25-27day-old seedlings and planting 3-4 seedlings in each hole.

The farmer groups experiments sought:1. To see the number of tillers resulting, and2. To determine differences in production between SRI and conventional methods (those

commonly used by farmers).

c. Experiment Outcomes

The results of these experiments turned out to be quite promising. In SRI methods, between 30-55 tillers were attained, and production reached an average of 8-10tonnes/hectare as opposed to 6-7.5 tonnes/hectare, and seed requirements went from 60-75 kg/hectare to only 6-7 kg/hectare.

d. Challenges EncounteredIn general, each farmers group, whether in Java or in Sumatra, encountered certainchallenges in using SRI, including:1. Taunting from families (especially their spouses) and other farmers when crops were

still 1-30 days old, because the fields looked unpromising. This stopped after 30 days2. Difficulties in convincing other people to experiment.3. Weed growth needing serious attention when crops are 10-30 days old.

2. NGO Partners Presentations

NGO presentations focused more on their views towards SRI and on the kinds of supportgiven to farmers.

a. PANSU (Bp. Sukardi)

First heard about SRI from LEISA magazine in 2000 and from Engkus Koeswara whowas visiting from Ciamis and who had some experience with SRI. From there theystarted to discuss SRI until interest in experimenting with SRI grew and grew.

Implementing SRI was difficult at first. In the Karya Maju farmer group, there were 10 people who wanted to experiment on a large scale; they wanted to plant 1 hectare, butSRI capabilities in their organization were still minimal. So they finally agreed upon anarea of 4000 m 2.


6/14

5

Apart from the WE modules, we also got information on SRI from the internet.Experiment results were not so good. At a routine meeting of farmers from the Ular River catchment area, discussions were initiated by Supar (farmer). Although results had not

been so good, many other farmers were interested.

Discussion Questions

Triharjanto (Sidoharjo): PANSU seem to have been somewhat successful; what stepswere taken to ensure successful dissemination of SRI?

Answer: Actually, I dont really agree if you say 'successful' because out of the 2000hectares of fields in Sungai Ular, only 2 hectares have been tried with SRI. But 10farmers who tried SRI disseminated information on it at the four-monthly forums.

Kasim (Lampung): You must be very happy to have tried SRI in several locations; inLampung we have tried it in only one location. How about aspects of future planning in

PANSU?Answer: In fact the issue with SRI is the problem of water. In future, SRI can work,albeit slowly, spreading from river estuaries to sources. SRI can reduce water use; maybeit can also reduce quarrels over water.

Darwis (NTB): The SRI system can curtail production costs, however the speaker yesterday explained it could increase production. Why then is PANSU not prepared tosay SRI has been a success?

Answer: People will get the wrong idea. We only see these experiments as beingsuccessful in curbing production costs. Farmers experiments there are still limited toseedbed media; they have yet to increase production. Production has increased by 36% inrice blocks, but it has been done haphazardly, so we are not yet prepared to say it has

been a success.

Speaker: (Anischan Gani) NGOs are not usually in a position to get very involved with rice crops becauseconservation efforts usually attract more funding; so rice production gets little attention.

NGOs and the government itself sometimes pay little attention. However, now there are NGOs that want to get out into the fields and this should be praised. Several months ago,there was a meeting of NGOs, research and development bodies, and other governmentinstitutions on SRI. However up until now there have been no further developments.

Water is indeed a problem everywhere. In the newspaper there were even peopleattacking each other with machetes over it. The water companys water has been stolen

because the water in rice fields has been too low. Whatever the background for developing SRI, it is best to fit it in with local conditions. Whether or not production will

be higher is a question for later, so do not promise anything now. But the yields should beat least what they were previously. However in terms of pests and disease damage, things


7/14

6

will be better. For example, Gogo rancah (a dry-wet rice planting system wherebyseedlings are planted in dry soil before the rains arrive) may be more appropriate in andaround the Brebes area, because that area has water shortages. Sometimes gogo rancah ismore successful than other types of rice production because it is particularly applicablefor the location.

To plan SRI dissemination, invite your friends from outside the village, ask farmers whohave already tried it to talk about their experiences with SRI; they will definitely start toexperiment with SRI. In my view, constant inundation of paddy fields with water isunnecessary.

Facilitator: In North Sumatra, 4,000 hectares of fields depend on irrigation from the Ular River. Now there is sand excavation. If it is difficult to control the water, perhaps SRIneeds to be modified, in what way?

Speaker: You need water reserves, such as embung (water catchment in field). You could

also water fields manually because irrigation water supply there is still good. Plantvarieties of rice that can withstand dry spells should be sought. The local governmentthere should not allow sand excavation. If necessary, invite the farmers to demonstrate tothe government.

b. JWJL Presentation (Kasim)

Farmers had experienced crop failures. Information on SRI was obtained from WE partners that are already using SRI, and partner groups were very responsive. One JWJLgroup drew the conclusion that SRI is extremely appropriate and should be developed inLampung. Farmers opinions have already changed away from asking about medicine(chemical pesticides) for controlling pests to asking how to succeed without this.

Results have shown an increase with SRI of approximately 30%, and now the authoritieshave already started getting involved. They have already appointed someone tocoordinate SRI activities. However, because their future funding is insecure, they are notsure if they can continue to support SRI .

Discussion questions

Pardi: JWJL locations had often had crop failure, how could you overcome this?

Answer: Crops had failed there due to a lack of water. From research we found the flowof the Way Seputih River was the cause. A solution to this matter could not be foundquickly. Different planting patterns are one alternative to solve the problem by plantingrice that can withstand water, for example gogo rancah . Water levels have gone down

because of large-scale sand excavation.

Sarto: What planting times in the JWJL area can be done concurrently, so that problemsencountered can be reduced?


8/14

7

Answer: Planting is indeed already done concurrently because of the limited water supply; if a crop is planted late, then it will not get its share of water. With the advent of SRI perhaps planting patterns can be developed. For pests this will indeed be a problem.

Anischan Gani: SRI was developed in paddies with technical irrigation capacities. It isnot rainfed rice production. If crops fail due to a lack of water, dont blame SRI for that.

ADRA has already experimented with SRI in Way Kanan involving the government.Perhaps you can get information from ADRA. For pests, experiments have already beenundertaken in Lampung; you can see the results there.

SRI can be developed for dry lands with a number of modifications. Planting fieldsconcurrently is already recommended by the government, this is done to avoid pests. TheSRI principle is sufficient water, not excessive amounts of water. You can see if rice

plants are lacking in water because their leaves roll up.

c. ALGHEINS Presentation (Sarto)

Farmers in Ponorogo have been made to lose out by several reasons. We see the need to be able to cut operating costs. The first objective is to increase knowledge and skills inSRI cultivation. Up until now, the emphasis has been on reducing the use of chemicals.The SRI being stressed uses animal fertilizer. Experiments were done over areas of 7 x 5m. At first the response from the community was one of disbelief, but after seeing theresults, many farmers are giving it a try. Organization management is facilitating farmersgroups implementing SRI. Activities undertaken are tying together information withother organizations, WE and LPTP. A donor organization for SRI does not yet exist.Chemical fertilizer use there is extremely high; up to 1.5 tonnes/hectare, and pesticide useis also very high using control for justification.

Discussion questions:

Muhrodli: The farmers joining SRI, do they learn together directly or individually?

Answer: Farmers who are not practicing SRI do not attend our farmer group meetings;they hear about SRI from farmers in other forums.

Anischan Gani:Farmers are losing out because of fertilizers problems and older seedlings. Dont be intoo much of a hurry to believe in subsidies given by the government. SRI should not usechemical fertilizer, but should just use organic fertilizers. Farmers can make plans/

proposals to develop their own experiments. The Algheins case is indeed very interesting because of the very high use of chemical fertilizer. I am interested in trying out anexperiment in Ponorogo. For SRI, dont promise an increase in production; productionincrease is only an extra benefit of the SRI system. In the future, suggest that farmers


9/14

8

curb the use of chemicals. Dont look for too much help from other people, but helpfarmers find their own way.

d. Presentation from VECO (Peny)

Agriculture is the main focus of VECO - formerly FADO. In 2001 the VECOorganization debated whether SRI should be tried within their program. With informationfrom LEISA magazine, VECO tried to publish a Sustainable Agriculture magazine(SALAM). In certain areas in NTB (Dompu and Bima), experiments in SRI will becarried out in the future. Hopefully in implementing their experiments with SRI, VECO

partners will work in cooperation with the local government (DINAS). Plans for thefuture will be continued in each organization (VECO partners) from input from thisworkshop. Technically speaking, VECO has yet to try SRI.


Muhrodli: What strategies have VECO been carrying out, and what problems have youencountered?

Answer: VECO is an organization from Belgium. A condition that has to be fulfilled isworking in cooperation with local organizations (not directly). Model-oriented strategy,demands policy changes, changes that are not too high-sounding, like government

programs.

Anischan Gani:Gogo rancah can be used with low rainfall. Do we need to implement SRI? In NTB,rainfall is sufficient. Need e-mails addresses of VECO partners to provide them withinformation. Does VECO make an Indonesian version of LEISA magazine?

Peny: Not all SALAM magazine articles are from LEISA magazine. There are severaltranslations, and a column for local articles.

Anischan Gani: LEISA provides information on sustainable agriculture. LITBANGBALITPA needs something like the VECO magazine (LEISA).

Peny: Only three issues of SALAM magazine have been published, and they will be sentto BALITPA addresses.

e. LGP Presentation (Jarwo)

The background as to why we adopted the SRI model is because existing agriculturalmodels cannot be implemented any more (a legacy of the green revolution); also becausethe price of inputs and chemical fertilizers are very high. It is hoped that with SRI we canincrease farmers incomes, take care of the ecosystem, maintain soil fertility levels, andimprove farmers human resources. From an economic angle, we hope there will be anincrease in production, increased income, and the ability to curtail production costs as


10/14

9

much as possible. From a socio-cultural angle, we hope for a change in farmers attitudes.From a political angle, farmers should have the freedom to determine their own choices.

Responses on SRI from LGP farmers: Extremely appropriate because SRI development isvery dominant at farmers and organization levels.

Discussion questions

Supardi: You said the use of chemical inputs was very high. How high is that use from planting to harvesting?

Answer: On average, 8 kuaintal (1 quintal = 100kg) fertilizer and pesticide.

Parjono: We are currently still using chemical inputs, but use in the field has beenreduced from 25-50 %.

Answer: There is already a curb on chemical fertilizer use, especially at the Farmer FieldSchool graduate level. This can also be seen among FFS graduates throughout Java.

Sutoyo: A suggestion. When our friend from Sidoarjo was invited to Waru to seeconditions in the field through observations, et cetera, next time, invite farmers along tosee from the visit what groups should do.

Answer: SRI will be socialized to farmers, and experiments and analysis will be carriedout and spread it to other places.

f. LPTP Presentation (Zamzaini)

The Rural Technology Development Foundation (Lembaga Pengembangan TeknologiPedesaan - LPTP) was established in Solo in 1978. During its development, thisfoundation gave autonomy to each of its programs, so that it consisted of 5 autonomousorganizations, i.e., Adiyasa Further Education, CB-tech (waste management), TekadInvesco (economic development), Susdec (training and advocacy), and LPTP (sustainableurban, rural and waterways development).

The sustainable agriculture program was developed in lowland regions with technicalirrigation, and in lowland areas using rain water. The sustainable agriculture programapproach is conducted through field schools, where field school groups are geared toward

becoming study centres for other farmers. In supporting communities, we should alwayslearn together with farmers in seeking and producing innovations in effective andefficient agricultural management, relatively easy to implement in both dry land andwetland fields.

Being interested in SRI, LPTP is aware that until now, crop cultivation in a number of regions still refers back to technology spelled out in the green revolution that reached its

peak with the food self-sufficiency initiative of 1984. However as a result of all sorts of


11/14

10

environmentally unfriendly technologies, there have been detrimental impacts on peopleand their environment.

Recent developments with the appearance of SRI have attracted the attention of severalorganizations including LPTP. SRI provides several alternatives for solving problems in

rice cultivation. Apart from that, SRI also has a simple feel and is easy for farmers toimplement.

Support information on SRI development: Before undertaking experiments, LPTPcollected lots of information on the technical scope of SRI. These activities were assistedfully by World Education as a partner in developing the learning process through fieldschools.

The response of partner farmers, before experimenting with SRI, was not too optimisticand even tended to be scathing. However, after experimenting together in the field, SRI

provided a good impact for farmers. It curtails operational costs and also maintains the

ongoing preservation of the environment. This is proven by farmers desire to try SRI intheir own fields.

Preparing field staff to maintain the quality of the learning process with farmers, LPTPmanagement pays serious attention to SRI. This was shown with the preparation of fieldstaff right from the beginning, starting from seeking information, facilitating study trips,up to giving full authority to staff interested in gaining deeper understanding of certaintechnologies, so that each field staff member has certain expertise in accordance with hisor her capacity.


PPL Delanggu: SRI has been talked about since 1990 and so far only the positive thingshave been said. How about the weaknesses over the long term so that we can anticipatewhat might happen.

Anischan Gani: For LPTP, specific locations are very important because SRI needs to bemodified in accordance with farmers abilities and resources. Dynamic implementationsuiting conditions in the field, in accordance with government policies, becauseanalytically, rice has yet to provide economic benefits for farmers. The obstacles to SRIthat I see are at the farmer level. For them SRI is controversial with the methods used byfarmers (regulating water, young seedlings, etc.). That is why farmers do not easilyaccept it just like that. Apart from that, there are difficulties with a lack of socializationand problems with waterway management. Therefore, consider it a high-risk methodology because of the habits of farmers up until now.

For the dinas question, technology is always developing, and the same goes for itschanges. So a technology packet is dynamic in nature and is not in fact determined by thegovernment. Therefore, changes will happen based on time. Rice field areas in Indonesiaare very narrow, meaning using airplanes for seeding will be extremely high cost. That is


12/14

11

why technology needs to be adjusted according to specific locations. An example isnuclear power from Japan that was previously used for electric lighting, but now forbidsthe use of nuclear power for electric lighting, so we must not use countries like Japan asexamples. Regarding SRI, it is not from Japan, but its principles appeared fromMadagascar.

Handoko: When we put together the modules we met first with Roland Bunch, whoexplained that SRI is not a technology, but revitalization of old rice planting principles.

3. Modules

SRI Modules written by World Education had already been used in the field for one year.During this opportunity, input was provided based on one year of experiences using themodules. Input from the workshop forum was as follows:

a. Front cover, should not be a photo of crops using the legowo model because SRIsuggests using square plant spacing. Besides facilitating weeding, this also gives rootsmore room to develop to the right and left.

b. More material is needed in the module on seed selection so that farmers gain anunderstanding of healthy (normal) seeds.

c. Weeds (page 4): Bear in mind that intercropping with pulses is impossible, except indry crop fields.

d. Seed bed nurseries (page 8): Nursery media need to be adjusted according to local potentials (not necessarily with wooden boxes). It would be better to make use of local resources (could be banana plant stems or even directly in the field itself). Moreattention to maintenance and crop care also needed.

e.

Seedlings (page 10): It should be explained that seedlings better not be over 7-12 daysold when planted because beyond this age new tillers start to appear.f. Seedling removal and planting (page 12): Needs further explanation as to reasons for

planting young seedlings and the principles of root configuration during planting that is, roots are not bent up, but are horizontal, and when possible could be planted atan angle.

g. Plant spacing (page 14): Better not to state plant spacing in the background section because there are no guarantees that land is prepared in each location. The ruler is notrepresentative because the picture shows legowo plant spacing.

h. Planting (page 17): The picture should further clarify planting depth and rootdirection as well as a picture of planting and the soil; could include the soil level and

how far the roots reach.i. Weeds and weeding (page 21): The alternative of controlling weeds withintercropping would be best left out of the module (intercropping). Weeding is bestdone after 2 weeks earlier and more intensively. Best to get rid of the picture of intercropping.


13/14

12

VII. Follow UpAfter 4 days of sharing experiences on SRI, each farmers group and NGO produced work

plans for their regions. These follow-up plans are as follows:

1. Farmers

Location Type of experiment Field size Participants Assistance neededSido Mekar Farmers Group (Klepu - Ponorogo) Meseri(Dec.2003)

Seedling age 12 daysPlant 1 seedlingPlanting spacing 20 cm X 20cm and 30 cm X 30 cm

150 m2 12 people Design experiments,observation

Makmur Farmers Group (Sidoharjo-Klaten)Ponadi(July 2003)

Compare organic and chemicalfertilizers, sintanur varieties(3 times)

1600 m2 10 people Design experiments,observation, field

plotting, analyzefarming businesses

Subur Makmur Farmers Group (Waru Boyolali)Parjono(Nov 2003)

Plant 7-14 day-old seedlings, plant 1 seedling/hill, plantspacing at 20 cm x 20 cm andat 30 cm x 30 cm

1800 m2 8 people Design experiments,observation

Sukamandi and Karanganyar (North Sumatra)Asri Organic and chemical fertilizer

doses8000 m2 10 people Guide book and design

experimentsSupardi Using organic fertilizer 20.000 m2 15 people Guide book and design

experimentsKrido Mulyo Farmers Group (Sambon-Boyolali)Collectivefields

Seedling age, fertilizer doses(high, medium, low andwithout fertilizer) look at

production costs

600 m2 8 people Design experimentsand support

Karya Bakti Farmers Group (Seputih Raman-Lampung Tengah)Sugiyo(Nov 2003)

Compare planting 1 and 2seedlings/hole, seedling age 12days, plant spacing at 25 cm x25 cm

600 m2 20 people, menand women

Design experimentsand technical supportand ATK

Collectivefields(Nov 2003)

Collectively implementingSRI

4400 m2 Sda sda

Individuals Implementation IndividualAdil Makmur Farmers Group (Papanrejo-Grobogan)Klp.Tani Plant spacing 20 cm x 20 cm,

IR 64 ss varieties, 1seedling/hill and 5-6seedlings/hill

600 m2 13 people SRI Module, ATK, partners

Sendang Mulyo Farmers Group (Kebonagung-Demak)MangunanLor

Compare SRI with localmethods

800 m2 20 people Module, ATK andsupport


14/14

13

TanjungSari(July 2003)

Plant spacing 25 cm x 25 cm,20 cm x 20 cm, seedling age7-10 days, Membramo

300 m2 15 people Design experiments,observation and support

2. NGOs

No Organization Planned activities1 PANSU Make an education and training program for Sungai Ular farmers in 3

hectare fields (5 years) gauge SRI, small-scale training in 8 villages, nofunding or support information as yet, Promote SRI to the organicagriculture network

2 JWJL Experiments at staff level, experiments at farmers level 4 groups eachconsisting of 20 farmers, coordinate with the authorities for programaccess, internal funding

3 ALGHEINS Discussions in the organization, farmers forums to discuss SRI, promoteSRI to the organic agriculture network, work together on innovations with

the Indonesian Farmers Network, funding as yet to be discussed with theorganization4 LPTP Cooperate with study centers to pass on experiment results to group

members, disseminate information about SRI through brochures, visits tostudy centres in Demak, Karang Gede, Sambon, Gubug, Tanjungsari, andSidoharjo, with or without donors, LPTP is still keen to implement SRI aslong as it is of benefit to farmers, development of SRI via the sustainableagriculture program umbrella

VECO Undertake experiments in SRI with partners in NTB.LPSM (Bima) Develop SRI FFSs with farmers, discuss SRI and cooperate with regional

technicians

5

LPMP(Dompu) Experiment with SRI in 7 villages, workshops on experiment outcomes,development of SRI, monitoring and evaluating SRI6 LGP Will discuss workshop outcomes with organizations first in order to

determine strategies for SRI issues7 World

EducationTechnical fortification, development of an international network, anational scale SRI program (?)

VIII. In Closing

We are all aware that agricultural technology will always continue to develop from year to year. Therefore, all of us, whether we farm directly or act as support partners, shouldalways be prepared and wise in dealing with every emerging technological issue. SRI iscurrently popular with rice farmers because, based on experience, SRI can increase

production and reduce farming costs.

Therefore it will be wiser if experiments with farmers carry out their evaluations together through a learning process in the field so that passing on information is not merelytechnology transfer, but is a process of mutual learning.

Documents

indonwedurep03